Is the Psion class balanced?

[KarinsDad]

Basically, Evards is a lot nastier until players start taking getting out of grapples into acount when building their characters. Once the Wizard starts devoting one spell slot to Dim Door, things are not so problematic. Course, most wizards don't want to do this when they only have one or two slots.

Actually, one slot is not always enough. The Psion in our group failed her Concentration roll yesterday and took 2 rounds to get out.

I also think that a significant number of D&D players haven't actually played many games where 4th level spells are common. I've noticed on these boards that there's a fairly strong belief that levels above ten are just too difficult to play. There was a poll about it I think.

In our campaigns, it's not that it is too difficult. It's that the group tends to splinter before we get there if we start at first or second level. In the past few years, we've had a lot of turnover with people going to Iraq, people moving to another state, couples splitting up, one person even died.

In our current campaign, we decided to start at 9th level and our group is already going to splinter and we only just got to 11th level (husband and wife moving to Germany in January and their roommate leaving town when they leave).

I'd just like once (actually, more than once, but once is a good start) for an entire group to go from 1st level to Epic without life interfering.

 

[irdeggman]

Ok. I misunderstood you. I thought you meant that by "one every other round" below that you did not mean once per round.



Going back to your earlier post:



Several assumptions here:

1) The Assassin knew of the PC's ability to manifest while paralyzed. I suspect that the Assassin merely pulled the PC into the water to drown the PC and to temporarily hide the body. Or possibly because the Assassin was evil and wanted the PC to die a slow horrible death instead of a quick one. This is called roleplaying. Some DMs do it. Once opponents stop fighting and are helpless, NPCs (and PCs) do not necessarily CDG as their first action after they think the fight is over. That's called metagaming. Both players and DMs sometimes do it (i.e. the DM knows the PC is capable of psionically counterattacking, so the DM does CDG until he is sure the PC is dead).

Alright since the assassin knew the PC was a manifester, why would he/she expose herself to psionic attacks? {You at least implied the assassin was specifically sent after your PC who it is reasonable to expect they would be somewhat prepared for commonly know tactics.

So why would the assassin want to "hide the body" even though he knew the psion wasn't dead yet? It is not a real stretch to assume the assassin knew he/she was paralyzing the psion.

Role-play is great (and I had actually made the guess the DM was doing the drowning for color but realized that it wouldn't work as a means of killing a character in this situation) {it does make for a real cinmatic picture} but should not bypass tactics that a character would reasonably be expected to use. An assassin, whether by class or merely trade, knows what they are doing sufficiently to know their target's abilities and habits. They also think of how to cover their tracks.

Sorry still doesn't make sense and poor DM tactics.

The NPC Assassin from her point of view was no longer in combat once the PC was paralyzed in the surprise round. It's only when I counterattacked in round one that she knew something was wrong. Now, whether her initiative beat mine so that she could pull my PC into the water before the PC counterattacked is something that I do not remember. I do remember her pulling my PC into the water. Even if the Psion won init, maybe she pulled the PC into the water to muffle the sounds of battle. I don't know. But, this is not necessarily a bad move on the Assassin's part. That's metagaming thinking.

No it is not metagame thinking (DMs plan encounters outside of in character thinking they react with the NPCs using in character thinking) - it is an analysis of the tactics used and what an NPC would be doing in the situation. Now if the assassin attempted to place the psion in the water in order to try to negate psionic attacks, well that makes sense as an attempt. But I did not have anything but what you provided to go on so there is no way to piece together everything only to analyze the situation as presented.

2) You assume an Attack of Opportunity every round. A Psion can manifest defensively unless you take a real literal reading of the rules.

Yes, it is entirely reasonable. I also assumed you couldn't cast or manest defensively if paralyzed. The reason you get an AoO is because the opponent is concentrating on manifesting. Now it is not clear if you can or cannot cast or manifest defensively when paralyzed, but I do think it is entirely reasonable since you can't move to avoid a blow or to cover your self and that is an inherent part of the defensive actions.

Now, this is an interesting rules situation. You get an AoO for someone manifesting. If they are paralyzed, how do you know they are manifesting in order to get an AoO (what if they hide the displays)?

Hiding displays (and casting) is something that while it makes sense logically doesn't play into the existing ruleset which has a more abstract treatment of combat. So until specific rules cover this it is not an issue for a rules discussion.

They can also attempt to manifest defensively which in the text states that they need to dodge and weave. Well, they cannot dodge and weave if helpless, so does that mean that they cannot manifest defensively when helpless? From a literal rules perspective, they cannot. I suspect that this was merely flavor text to explain why an AoO occurs (this is not the explanation for cast defensively), but it could easily be literally ruled no manifesting defensively while helpless.

I think it is clearly the intent that they cannot manifest defensively when helpless or incapable of movement since they cannot move to avoid an incoming blow. Pretty much the same rules work for casting defensively.

This has always been a hole in the AoO rules. If a Wizard is prone next to you and casts a spell, you get an AoO against him. If a Wizard is prone next to you and is invisible and casts a spell with no Verbal component (and potentially no other components), you get an AoO against him. If a Wizard is prone next to you unconscious (or stunned), you do not get an AoO against him. The unconscious Wizard has more of a defense against a free attack then the conscious Wizard detectable or not (unless there is a rules change in 3.5 that I am unaware of).

In order to get an AoO you must threaten the target. You don't threaten an invisible creature until you know they are there - an invisible wizard casting a spell can do so without generating an AoO.

I do not remember the order of battle, nor all of the powers I manifested. I do know that I manifested an Astral Construct to distract and damage her, I manifested a Vigor to keep me alive longer, and I manifested an Energy Bolt Sonic (or Energy Ray Sonic, not sure which) to both damage her and to alert my allies.


In any case, the situation was probably adjudicated reasonably ok. Psions are not truly helpless, even when paralyzed. No amount of "Did your DM remember to do this?" is really going to change that.

Correct no amount of questioning of DM tactics will change your opinion based on events.

It will, however serve to point out that the situation was most likely not handled as well as it should have been. This in turn reinforces my point that your psion shouldn't have been able to plow through encounters as easily as you have portrayed. This in turn reinforces my stance that psions are not overpowering if the game is handled well.

Pretty much almost everything you have laid out shows why you came to the conclusion that psions are overpowering and almost all fo them (based on thsi exchange) goes back to the game not being constructed to properly challange your PC. If your PC had taken more damage in the bath encounter I do believe you would have different opinion of how powerful a psion can be - especially if that process was carried over into the remmainder of the game.

In general PCs (of any class) should succeed but have to work at it. If they are not having to work at it (on the average) then the game is not being run correctly and the players (and DM) will get a slanted opinion of how things are based on the rules and game design.

 

[Dinkeldog]

Hiding displays (and casting) is something that while it makes sense logically doesn't play into the existing ruleset which has a more abstract treatment of combat. So until specific rules cover this it is not an issue for a rules discussion.

Actually, I think there is a valid rules discussion for this question, but perhaps it would be better if it were taken to another thread.

 

[KarinsDad]

Alright since the assassin knew the PC was a manifester, why would he/she expose herself to psionic attacks? {You at least implied the assassin was specifically sent after your PC who it is reasonable to expect they would be somewhat prepared for commonly know tactics.

I implied no such thing and I stated no such thing. You are reading things into this and making assumptions, just to support your point of view.

So why would the assassin want to "hide the body" even though he knew the psion wasn't dead yet? It is not a real stretch to assume the assassin knew he/she was paralyzing the psion.

It's a public bathhouse. If someone heard a noise and walked in, or someone just happened to walk in (an employee for example), it might be easier if the body is hidden. Maybe not. Not every Assassin has an Int of 20 and picks a brilliant action every round.

But, it is totally reasonable for an Assassin to hide a paralyzed body. It is not reasonable to you because it blows apart your assumptions.

Role-play is great (and I had actually made the guess the DM was doing the drowning for color but realized that it wouldn't work as a means of killing a character in this situation) {it does make for a real cinmatic picture} but should not bypass tactics that a character would reasonably be expected to use. An assassin, whether by class or merely trade, knows what they are doing sufficiently to know their target's abilities and habits. They also think of how to cover their tracks.

Sorry still doesn't make sense and poor DM tactics.

It doesn't make sense to you because you know of the Psion's abilities.

I doubt the Assassin knew much of my abilities. She probably thought I was a Wizard or Sorcerer. Possibly a Fighter/Wizard due to my Greatsword. Maybe she put me in the water to not only drown me, but to ensure that if the poison wore off, I could not cast spells with verbal components. A Wizard might have a contingency spell to get rid of poison.

We were in a city fighting demons in the sewers. While at it, we messed up the plans of the local thieves guild. Since my PC always attempted to hide her display (since it's a free action to do so), I doubt many if any people in the city knew of her powers. I suspect the Assassin was sent to kill the party, not to kill my PC specifically.

And again, maybe the Assassin was cruelly evil and wanted the PC to die a slow horrible death.

But, metagaming thinking does not support roleplaying, hence, the reason you dismiss this so lightly.

No it is not metagame thinking (DMs plan encounters outside of in character thinking they react with the NPCs using in character thinking) - it is an analysis of the tactics used and what an NPC would be doing in the situation. Now if the assassin attempted to place the psion in the water in order to try to negate psionic attacks, well that makes sense as an attempt. But I did not have anything but what you provided to go on so there is no way to piece together everything only to analyze the situation as presented.

It is metagaming thinking for NPCs to always know the abillites of the PCs. In that entire campaign, there were only 4 Psions ever (tmk, the DM could have had some hiding around). The two PCs and the two allied NPCs. There were a few psionic monsters to fight every once in a while.

Most NPCs should know very little of psionics in a psionics is rare campaign.

In order to get an AoO you must threaten the target. You don't threaten an invisible creature until you know they are there - an invisible wizard casting a spell can do so without generating an AoO.

Do you have rules to back this up?

You threaten the squares around you. If certain actions occur in those squares, you get an AoO. Nothing in the rules, TMK, indicates that you have to be aware of the target being there or of the target performing the action.

If the former were true, you could not AoO an invisible Wizard who is not using components.

If the latter were true, then the Psion could manifest while paralyzed at will because her opponent would not know she is manifesting until after the fact and would get no AoO.

It will, however serve to point out that the situation was most likely not handled as well as it should have been. This in turn reinforces my point that your psion shouldn't have been able to plow through encounters as easily as you have portrayed. This in turn reinforces my stance that psions are not overpowering if the game is handled well.

And yet again you imply that the DM did not handle it properly, based yet again on assumptions and supposition.

Not only that, you've only made two points here:

1) The DM might have allowed an immediate action during a surprise round.
2) The DM might have allowed manifest defensively while the PC was paralyzed.

If the former is true, it's a valid point. The psion would have had slightly more power than she should have. But, surprise rounds are a very small part of combat and you don't always get attacked in them (sometimes, the bad guys move to position or attack someone else in the group or something). It is not the reason this particular psion was so successful. She was so successful because psionic Elans (i.e. ones with more than 2 PP) are broken.

If the latter is true, it's mostly irrelevant since the Psion was paralyzed in one encounter out of about 60 encounters in this campaign (8+ months, 1-3 encounters per 7 hour session per week).

Pretty much almost everything you have laid out shows why you came to the conclusion that psions are overpowering and almost all fo them (based on thsi exchange) goes back to the game not being constructed to properly challange your PC. If your PC had taken more damage in the bath encounter I do believe you would have different opinion of how powerful a psion can be - especially if that process was carried over into the remmainder of the game.

Again, you assume. Your entire argument is based off assumptions.

I've DM and played for nearly 30 years. I would know if the DM was making it easy for us. And in fact, this DM has challenged us more than any DM I've ever played under because he is one of those people who is constantly reading Dragon magazine, surfing the forums for good ideas, etc. It was a real joy to experience some of the twisted ideas that came at us.

I'd also put my experience up against your assumptions when it comes to a balance discussion any day of the week.

+8 to defeat Power Resistance in a game where magic and psionics are the same is ludicrous when it comes to balance.

Sure, you have to expend your focus. Big deal. That's easy enough to get back, even within the same combat.

The argument that you have to use up your psionic focus to do some particular psionic activity, hence you are really limited, is a really weak argument once you get out of low levels. At mid to high levels, you can do these types of activities practically at will.

Pro-psionic people are unwilling to admit that some of psionics is balanced, but some of it is very much not balanced.

In general PCs (of any class) should succeed but have to work at it. If they are not having to work at it (on the average) then the game is not being run correctly and the players (and DM) will get a slanted opinion of how things are based on the rules and game design.

If the DM is having to go out of his way to challenge one PC class over all of the other PC classes, then you have a balance issue.

That's the entire point of this discussion.

 

[irdeggman]

But, it is totally reasonable for an Assassin to hide a paralyzed body. It is not reasonable to you because it blows apart your assumptions.

Not if the target is only paralyzed. The use of the word "assassin" implies someone hired to kill the target. Otherwise it would be some kind of thug and hence some other possibility exists like kidnapping and ransom - but you used the term assassin so I went with that.

I suspect the Assassin was sent to kill the party, not to kill my PC specifically.

That makes sense but again I wasn't there nor have I talked to the DM and now this an assumption on your part.

And again, maybe the Assassin was cruelly evil and wanted the PC to die a slow horrible death.

Using a paralytic poison vice a slow and painful one?

But, metagaming thinking does not support roleplaying, hence, the reason you dismiss this so lightly.

Poor assumption on your part.

All of my statements on actions by the assassin are based on what would the DM do if creating a character and situation. The DM creates a personality and character (i.e., race, class, skills, feats, etc.) then plays some initial role to set the scene then the DM works off of the players.

Most NPCs should know very little of psionics in a psionics is rare campaign.

This is why psionics are skewed in your game and thus have formed the obvious basis of your opinion.

A PC psion in a psionics rare campaign is very powerful, like a PC wizard in a magic rare campaign is likewise very powerful. Just a statement of fact.

Quote:
Originally Posted by irdeggman
In order to get an AoO you must threaten the target. You don't threaten an invisible creature until you know they are there - an invisible wizard casting a spell can do so without generating an AoO.



Do you have rules to back this up?

How about this?

Total Concealment: If you have line of effect to a target but not line of sight he is considered to have total concealment from you. You can’t attack an opponent that has total concealment, though you can attack into a square that you think he occupies. A successful attack into a square occupied by an enemy with total concealment has a 50% miss chance (instead of the normal 20% miss chance for an opponent with concealment).

You can’t execute an attack of opportunity against an opponent with total concealment, even if you know what square or squares the opponent occupies.

INVISIBILITY
The ability to move about unseen is not foolproof. While they can’t be seen, invisible creatures can be heard, smelled, or felt.

Invisibility makes a creature undetectable by vision, including darkvision.

Invisibility does not, by itself, make a creature immune to critical hits, but it does make the creature immune to extra damage from being a ranger’s favored enemy and from sneak attacks.

A creature can generally notice the presence of an active invisible creature within 30 feet with a DC 20 Spot check. The observer gains a hunch that “something’s there” but can’t see it or target it accurately with an attack. A creature who is holding still is very hard to notice (DC 30). An inanimate object, an unliving creature holding still, or a completely immobile creature is even harder to spot (DC 40). It’s practically impossible (+20 DC) to pinpoint an invisible creature’s location with a Spot check, and even if a character succeeds on such a check, the invisible creature still benefits from total concealment (50% miss chance).

I'd also put my experience up against your assumptions when it comes to a balance discussion any day of the week.

No need to engage in this one.

I have to my credit written, cowritten and edited the BRCS (at Birthright.net) which brought the Birthright campaign setting into 3.0 and is now being upped to 3.5. It is "Official" and everything. So, since you know nothing about my knowledge of balance and such - one heck of a statement I think.

The argument that you have to use up your psionic focus to do some particular psionic activity, hence you are really limited, is a really weak argument once you get out of low levels. At mid to high levels, you can do these types of activities practically at will.

Not my arguement someone else's who disagrees with you.

Pro-psionic people are unwilling to admit that some of psionics is balanced, but some of it is very much not balanced.

Again one heck of a broad statement. I have never said that somethings in the psionics system aren't broken, just like some things in the magic system or most any part of D&D is not broken.

I do however feel the system itself is fairly well balanced and psions as a class are as balanced as any other class - again everything depends on the circumstances and campaign. I also believe that bards are a viable (and enjoyable) class but very dependent on circumstances for how "useful" they are.

If the DM is having to go out of his way to challenge one PC class over all of the other PC classes, then you have a balance issue.

That's the entire point of this discussion.

Maybe and maybe not. If the DM is allowing a player to play the only psion in the entire campaign or the only wizard in the campaign is that balanced? This is just an extreme comparison used to point out that the balance of most things are circumstantial and thus depend on the DM.

 

[KarinsDad]

This is why psionics are skewed in your game and thus have formed the obvious basis of your opinion.

A PC psion in a psionics rare campaign is very powerful, like a PC wizard in a magic rare campaign is likewise very powerful. Just a statement of fact.

This is not a statement of fact at all.

A Wizard in a magic rare campaign still has the limitations of a Wizard. For example, typically not able to cast if paralyzed. Unable to cast most of his spells if grappled, etc.

How about this?

That works.

No need to engage in this one.

I have to my credit written, cowritten and edited the BRCS (at Birthright.net) which brought the Birthright campaign setting into 3.0 and is now being upped to 3.5. It is "Official" and everything. So, since you know nothing about my knowledge of balance and such - one heck of a statement I think.

Cool.

It still does not make you right, nor give you the right to come here and claim that my DM was making it easy for me with no facts to back up your claim.

As for you knowledge of balance, I have no clue outside of the fact that you are attempting to prove my DM incompetent, just to illustrate a psionic balance point you have yet to even make. That is in extremely poor taste IMO.

PS. I have a D20 supplement book writing credit to my name as well. A lot of people here do. I'm glad you are helping out the cause, but you seem to want to argue just to argue and you are using an encounter in my game to do so. Lame.

Maybe and maybe not. If the DM is allowing a player to play the only psion in the entire campaign or the only wizard in the campaign is that balanced? This is just an extreme comparison used to point out that the balance of most things are circumstantial and thus depend on the DM.

There is also rules balance. That is what we attempt to discuss here.

You are trying to skew it into an individual "What did this DM do?" type of discussion.

That has nothing to do with the rules and whether some set of rules are balanced in general.

In fact, I'm still waiting for a point from you that illustrates that psionics is balanced or not. So far, all you seem to be focusing on is one combat in one game.

 

[Nail]

....a cool ambush/combat, BTW.

Back On-Topic, psionics seems unbalanced (to me) when played along with other magic-users. The other magic users have checks and balances, while the psion has fewer.

Grappling, silence, gp/XP costs, energy-switching, DC augmentation, manifesting all high-level powers, specific power/feat imbalances, etc..... That list should cover the high-lights, at least.

And => YMMV.

 

[Scion]

And => YMMV.

And apparently does.

Grappling

No caster types like to be in a grapple. Psions do have an easier time of it.

Although I personally consider this an issue with other caster types having a problem that they need to work on.

Grappling itself is kindof wonky though.. most creatures, even those designed for it, are better off 'not' grappling except in special circumstances, especially against a party.Typically it cuts down how many attacks they get to make and makes them more vulnerable to attack, plus not everyone is overly hindered by it to begin with.

silence

Which, given its low level and the havock it can play with the system, is a broken spell. Fix the spell.

gp/XP costs

Yes, this is a rather large detriment to the psion Where the wizard usually gets to pay a bit of gold for a focus or component the psion has to burn something much more precious: exp.

energy-switching

Which of course actually makes energy abilities useful.

Bad players! trying to be useful and making viable builds instead of feeling worthless and giving up.

DC augmentation

At cost, along with it being easier for the other caster types to do consistantly with feats.

Not all powers even augment, of those not all augment well, of those not all augment dcs, and of those that do augment dcs some do it very slowly.

The other caster types could also heighten for increased dcs and other benefits also.

manifesting all high-level powers

At the expense of versitility (in the case of the wizard and cleric) or durability (in the case of the specialist wizard, sorcerer, or cleric).

specific power/feat imbalances

Assuming that this is true there are still way, way more in the magic side of the equation.. but apparently that is ok.

etc

Yep. There are counterarguements all over for what you have put up, and likely for most everything you have not.

One has to look at the system as a whole and how interactions work. Taking things too far out of context can make anything look strange.

 

[Nail]

Yep. There are counterarguements all over for what you have put up, and likely for most everything you have not.

Scion, of course there are counter-arguements! And there are counter-counter-arguements, etc.

Now then, whether the counter-counter-counter agruements are any good is another matter.

 

[irdeggman]

....a cool ambush/combat, BTW.

Back On-Topic, psionics seems unbalanced (to me) when played along with other magic-users. The other magic users have checks and balances, while the psion has fewer.

Grappling, silence, gp/XP costs, energy-switching, DC augmentation, manifesting all high-level powers, specific power/feat imbalances, etc..... That list should cover the high-lights, at least.

And => YMMV.

I agree the class is balanced.

Another example of balance is the powers known.

When compared to a sorcerer a psion knows fewer. The trade off is that he can generally make the ones he knows more powerful via augmentation.

As far as I've been able to tell a psion can't increase the number of powers known via research - although he can learn new powers if the DM allows it. Pretty much the same limitation as a sorcerer in this regard.

Wizards can of course know any spelll on their list plus whatever they wish/are allowed to research.

Another factor is the lesser amount of area affecting powers when compared to spells.

A psion can do a lot of damage to a single opponent (albeit by burning through pps fairly quickly) where a wizard can do lesser damage over a greater area. Basically a wizard is more effective at combating a horde of oncoming orcs while a psion is better at taking out the BBEG.